my bravo outdrive gear experiment
#71
Konrad suggests the Royal purple gear lube. However a Bravo drive is not a Konrad, it's like trying to make chicken salad out of chicken $#!+ !!!!!!
If anyone has the answer for drive problems it's Konrad ! They are a company dedicated to making tough dependable drives, and are priced reasonably. BBB
If anyone has the answer for drive problems it's Konrad ! They are a company dedicated to making tough dependable drives, and are priced reasonably. BBB
#72
Smitty, a few years ago, one of the tricks people people used to make Bravo's last longer was use 1.36 gears instead of the 1.5's. More stress is pushed to the prop and away from the lower gears. Since you need some new gears anyway, you might want to try that. Someone here could probably lend you a prop to test with. Ian
#73
I had great results years back when I changed an alpha from 1.50-1 to 1.32-1 .
Before that I was blowing up lowers. I ran close to 400 Hp through it. Ran for several seasons, still have it and would bolt it on and go. That was on my 21' 454 Baja BBB
Ps.. I think it has something to do with the power coming up gradually (motor has more load) instead of shocking the drive winding up to max Hp out of the hole . This is true even if you drive it sanely !
Before that I was blowing up lowers. I ran close to 400 Hp through it. Ran for several seasons, still have it and would bolt it on and go. That was on my 21' 454 Baja BBB
Ps.. I think it has something to do with the power coming up gradually (motor has more load) instead of shocking the drive winding up to max Hp out of the hole . This is true even if you drive it sanely !
Last edited by Big Block Billy; 08-07-2006 at 10:24 AM.
#74
Registered

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 37
Likes: 1
You are running much more torque on the drive than it has been designed for.
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
#75
Registered

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 3,684
From: On A Dirt Floor
Remember, Gears (if not 1:1) change torque multiplication - not just rpms.
600ft/lbs x 1.5 = 900ft/lbs
600ft/lbs x 1.32 = 792 ft/lbs
After any gear , the following parts will have to handle multiplied torque if higher than 1:1 or fractional torque if less than 1:1 .
The part I have no idea about - is how the propellor effects this. If it does. LOL. SOmeone please let me know - this has been bothering me, but apparently not enough to sit down and figure it out.
600ft/lbs x 1.5 = 900ft/lbs
600ft/lbs x 1.32 = 792 ft/lbs
After any gear , the following parts will have to handle multiplied torque if higher than 1:1 or fractional torque if less than 1:1 .
The part I have no idea about - is how the propellor effects this. If it does. LOL. SOmeone please let me know - this has been bothering me, but apparently not enough to sit down and figure it out.
#76
Thread Starter
Platinum Member

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,317
Likes: 1,037
From: frankenmuth michigan
Originally Posted by joee
You are running much more torque on the drive than it has been designed for.
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
#77
Thread Starter
Platinum Member

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,317
Likes: 1,037
From: frankenmuth michigan
Originally Posted by SB
Remember, Gears (if not 1:1) change torque multiplication - not just rpms.
600ft/lbs x 1.5 = 900ft/lbs
600ft/lbs x 1.32 = 792 ft/lbs
After any gear , the following parts will have to handle multiplied torque if higher than 1:1 or fractional torque if less than 1:1 .
The part I have no idea about - is how the propellor effects this. If it does. LOL. SOmeone please let me know - this has been bothering me, but apparently not enough to sit down and figure it out.
600ft/lbs x 1.5 = 900ft/lbs
600ft/lbs x 1.32 = 792 ft/lbs
After any gear , the following parts will have to handle multiplied torque if higher than 1:1 or fractional torque if less than 1:1 .
The part I have no idea about - is how the propellor effects this. If it does. LOL. SOmeone please let me know - this has been bothering me, but apparently not enough to sit down and figure it out.
. If anything I would figure the prop shaft would have 15% less twist acting on it,but Ive never twisted one off so it would be a moot point. I do know this though,with these forged,beveled tooth non helical gear sets you pretty much only have one tooth contacting another at anyone time so I'm thinking thats where the problem lies. Strip brought this up a long time ago and it makes sense,aside from deflection that could be occuring,there is just 1 little tooth at any given time transmitting over 1000ft lbs of multiplied tq so it seems for it to last it would take the very best alloy and heat treating or surface conditioning,Smitty
#78
Registered
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 3
From: PA and MD
The 27" prop will have less 'resistance' to spinning than the 30" and will transmit less force/deflection to the propshaft and allow the pinion gear to stay better meshed with the vertical?
#79
Thread Starter
Platinum Member

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 7,317
Likes: 1,037
From: frankenmuth michigan
Originally Posted by cobra marty
The 27" prop will have less 'resistance' to spinning than the 30" and will transmit less force/deflection to the propshaft and allow the pinion gear to stay better meshed with the vertical?
#80
Originally Posted by joee
You are running much more torque on the drive than it has been designed for.
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
How is the deflection of the shafts under such a big load.
Too much deflection would disturb the correct meshing of teeth.
Have you already tried a tooth contact pattern lacquer (Klüber P39-462 or DYKEM # 80400/80496) in order to verify how the teeth are meshing under load.
Joee
BBB


